I'm happy for them. There isn't such a thing as too soon. My sister and her ex-husband dated for 6 years and divorced 7 years after getting married. My parents dated for 2 years and divorced when I was 8. My aunt and uncle dated for two months and they're about to celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary. There's no rhyme or reason when it comes to relationships.
For those who're wondering, he's an actor and comedian featured on SNL:

NOPE.
It was his private life. If he wants to say the most awful things, it is his right. Unless he does something illegal, there are labor laws which protect employees in some cases for political speech (he should take his case to the NLRB to see what the board concludes, if they conclude his firing was unlawful, he could sue).
The only cases according to the NLRB in which a firing for political speech is lawful is if you, and I quote:
I don't think this is the case, so he has grounds for wrongful dismissal lawsuit. In most cases, the person is engaging in protected speech so firing him for speaking his mind, even if you think what he said was repulsive, and without the exceptional cases I mentioned above, is UNLAWFUL.

I didn't ﻿explicitly state such a thing. I was referring to her being the headliner as my 16 minute remark points to. I didn't say FULL show, but I said "Nobody deserves to watch 16 minutes of Britney." So you're once again cherry picking the parts of my comments that suit your response.
You didn't prove me wrong because I never said she's never done a show. My statement was that she'll never get to do a FULL show (again, 16 minutes implies a full show), and you're indeed lying or being wilfully obtuse if you read it as something else.
You just can't accept the fact you misinterpreted my original comment and rushed to write a response, without reading the whole things which leaves no place for ambiguity. A 16 minute show is a FULL show. That's what my comment stated. But that wasn't even the point of my comment.
You're still not discussing the fact that current-day Britney can't headline a Super Bowl because nobody wants to see someone lip-sync to album tracks and dance like a robot for 16 minutes. I wonder why you chose to ignore this and instead try to prove me wrong that she had performed 17 YEARS AGO (as if I didn't know it already please... it's one of the very rare occasions in which she sang live so I do know she performed, but it was an eternity ago).

Once again you're lying. I said:
I didn't insult her, I question her ability to entertain for 16 minutes with her usual lip-synced studio vocals and robotic dancing. I was obviously referring to a FULL (I did say 16 MINUTES of her performing). The rest is just a bunch of lies. I never said she hadn't done a HT Show. I never said that IN THE PAST she was not able to hold her own. I questioned whether she can do it now, as she doesn't sing live anymore (well, maybe once every 2 years) and her dancing leaves a lot to be desired.
AGAIN. LIES. You put words in my mouth I didn't say. You purposely played dumb and misinterpret the whole point of comment. And you replied with a comment that had absolutely NOTHING to do with my original comment, since I NEVER SAID she hadn't done a Super Bowl.
It's almost as if I'm having a conversation with a deaf person

LYING BY OMISSION
You ARE a liar. You purposely omit CRUCIAL facts. You knew DAMN WLL I was talking about her headlining a HT Show. I think you might have a compulsive behavior, sis. The amount of lies that you keep spewing is reaching alarming numbers. I'm concerned about your well-being.